Myth about winning 1965 War

Re: Myth about winning 1965 War

Muqawiee bhai, i know it laikan remember your signature....

                                                                                     [RIGHT]بدل جاتی ھے جب نسبت، بدل جاتی ھے ھستی بھی 

وہ خود اپنا نہیں رھتا ، جسے کہتے ھو تم اپنا[/RIGHT]

so who knows, ho skata hai kissie kee nasbat badal jayee kissie waqat aur woh bee civilized ho jayee! till then, i will continue my been bajana!

Re: Myth about winning 1965 War

Re: Myth about winning 1965 War

India would have never known the details in any case. It is highly unusual for countries to have knowledge of such high level intelligence details. Despite all the improvement in sophisticated intelligence data collecting, countries would still not be able to make such acute estimation of enemy's remaining stockpile. They defeat their enemies on the weakness of their strategies and apartment strength.

But India was 7xs the size of Pakistan, so their 80% reserve would still have been more than Pakistan's 100% reserve. Indian would have definitely prolonged the war if it was indeed in a winning position.

It's like Russia, despite being technically inferior to their Western European counterparts in every war, it always looked to prolong the war in a way that it preferred Western Armies knocking on Eastern borders as no one could fight in Russian winters like Russian soldiers. Russians were masters of the strategy of exhausting the enemy.

Re: Myth about winning 1965 War

Hitler nearly defeated them but lets not digress too much! :D

As for indopak wars, india did prepare better in 1971. I don't know if it was pakistani stupidity or indians' alertness, but I think that it was Pakistani stupidity, when Pakistan openly ordered cold weather hiking equipment from a company in London which also did business with India. India took notice right away and gone was Siachen from that day.

I think that this is also the reason, aside from not winning any wars against India, that the army gets abused in Pakistan. Seriously, couldn't the ISI covertly buy hiking equipment?

Re: Myth about winning 1965 War

Go through the numbers quoted as references, it will lead you to world authenticate magazines/documents from where these excerpts were taken. But since you are in mode of 'main na manoo' so be it.

Re: Myth about winning 1965 War

Children here always quote wikipedia if the they get information about their assignments. I don't know from where are you are getting this false information?

Re: Myth about winning 1965 War

Maybe "children" but not adults who wish to talk oh so serious academic history. Can't say about US and Pakistan, but History is considered a serious topic in UK and Europe, Wikipedia as a source is highly discouraged in academic writings - secondary schools onward. They have national Archives with millions of state documents and libraries to encourage writing of proper evidence and research based history.

The document you copied and pasted is a very vague cable. Doesn't even look original.

Re: Myth about winning 1965 War

Information in Wikipedia is not written by one person. It is compilation of facts published in different magazines, journals and official documents. I would say 99% of the information is correct and yes always referred by adults too.

Re: Myth about winning 1965 War

Gibraltar, Grand Slam and war - Newspaper - DAWN.COM

Is Lt. Gen Mehmood Ahmed a reliable source?

This isn’t a week for civilians. Wars old and new will be celebrated and much made of the abilities and wisdom of the Great Protectors. Which is fine, really. What’s a week between friends.
Especially if there’s not much good to say. 1965 was a bad idea taken to perfection, all three stages of it. First came Gibraltar, that silliness of sending irregulars and radicalised civilians over into India-held Kashmir to foment revolution.
When revolution didn’t show up, we got into the busi*ness of Grand Slam — sending regular army troops over to wrest a bit of India-held Kashmir and win that most lusted after of victories, a strategic one.
[HR][/HR]We don’t have to rely on uninformed opinion, because there is a uniformed one available.[HR][/HR]Then came actual war across the border, for which we were somehow unprepared and scrambled to fight to a stalemate because the Indians were a bunch of reluctant invaders.
Told you, it’s not a week for civilians. Luckily, we don’t have to rely on uninformed opinion, because there is a uniformed one available.
An eminent one — dripping with medals, reached the highest offices, tasked to write the official tale of 1965 and took two decades to do it. But then he got the funny idea of publishing his 650-page report, which was promptly banned by the army and never heard of again.
It’s a good week to remember the forgotten. Coming to you from a dusty shelf, the words of Lt Gen (retd) Mahmud Ahmed from a tome rather unassumingly and modestly titled History of the Indo-Pak War — 1965.
Tell us, General, what was Operation Gibraltar all about?
“The military aim of launching the guerrilla operations was threefold. Firstly, disrupt Indian civil and military control of the State. Secondly, to encourage, assist and direct an armed revolt by the people of Kashmir against Indian military occupation, and thirdly, to created conditions for an advance by the Azad Kashmir forces into the heart of occupied Kashmir and eventual liberation of IHK.”
So, how’d it go?
“The intelligence directorates were unable to provide any worthwhile intelligence to 12 Division for the guerrilla operations. Each commander of the Gibraltar Forces was given a few names of collaborators whom they were able to contact after infiltration into inside Indian Held Kashmir but their reliability was uncertain. In fact, none came forth to help the guerrilla forces. Therefore, despite undetected infiltration across the Cease Fire Line, all the Gibraltar Forces, with the exception of Ghaznavi, ran into trouble at the very outset of their operations.”
Then what, General?
“In the event, the Gibraltar Forces were unable to initiate any large scale uprisings in IHK as was visualised or hoped. Instead, the Indian Army in Kashmir retaliated violently resulting in the loss of some valuable territory. Undismayed by these losses, [Maj Gen Akhtar Hussain Malik, commander of 12 Division] was able to convince GHQ that the time for the attack he had envisaged through the Munawwar Gap was indeed opportune since the bulk of the Indian Army in IHK was committed in the retaliatory operations in addition to its involvement in counter-insurgency measures. A reluctant GHQ was thus compelled to act in accordance with Gen Akhtar’s proposal by sheer force of circumstances rather than by sound professional reasoning which demanded logical military contingency preparations from the very moment when the decision to launch Operation Gibraltar was first taken.”
How’d one screw-up, Gibraltar, lead to an even bigger cock-up, Grand Slam?
“If anything, the limited guerrilla operation [Gibraltar] served as pinpricks to rouse a slumbering giant as it were, though India initially went into action almost reluctantly with a self-imposed restraint of confining its attacks to the upper parts of Kashmir. Operation Grand Slam was a logical move after the failure of the guerrilla operations.”
Civilian note: Mahmud doesn’t think Grand Slam was a bad idea. He thinks it was not ambitious enough — the army should have gone for Jammu and created a giant Punjabi pincer to gobble up the Indian armed forces. Total victory could have been ours! Oh, generals.
So, err, what happened next?
“The Pakistani high command considered the international boundary with India and the Working Boundary with the State of Jammu and Kashmir inviolable and expected its Indian counterpart also to regard it as such. From the inviolability of the international boundary sprang the policy of ‘no provocation’. Having had all defence works dismantled and the mines removed as part of the Kutch agreement, the GHQ forbade occupation of defences along the Punjab border on the eve of Operation Grand Slam to avoid provoking India into launching an offensive across the international boundary.”
You’re saying we left ourselves open to invasion, General?
“It is a matter of great irony that despite its forward assembly the Pakistan Army still managed to allow itself to be surprised by the Indian attack on 6 September 1965! The Indian build-up (as reaction to Operation Grand Slam), of which there were clear indications since 3 or 4 September, was somehow not taken note of. It was only after listening to an All India Radio broadcast in the evening of 4 September that the Pakistan C-in-C, Gen Muhammad Musa, reached the conclusion that Indian intentions were hostile. Then too the GHQ sent a rather ambiguous signal message to the formations.”
But the fight was heroic, yes?
“Apart from the sheer number of tanks involved, it is well worth asking if the armoured battles were really great by any standard? The fact is both sides lacked skill in handling armour at the operation level.”
In the end, we did get something out of it, right? Right?
“In the case of Pakistan, if it was solution of Kashmir, then we failed; if it was merely to defreeze the issue, then the means employed and risks taken were grossly disproportionate to the results achieved. In the bargain, we got a war which we perhaps did not want and could have avoided.”
So there it is. An official history by an official general in a proper book with maps and diagrams. But who needs history when we’ve got a war to celebrate.

Re: Myth about winning 1965 War

It seems that you are neither a professor nor have children in school. So, let me school you as someone who went to school here, wikipedia is expressively banned as a source. There is even a funny story of how my classmate changed a wiki entry to be false and this girl still used it and failed when the professor explicitly disallowed wikipedia.

Re: Myth about winning 1965 War

The references mentioned in Wikipedia are not banned. So keep your wisdom to yourself. If some one quote references from Time, Life, or any authenticate journal or international news paper, taken from Wikipedia, kisi mai ke lal main himat hay ke us ko challege kare :) Wikipedia is starting point for the research.

Read the report at post # 149, this is exactly what Wikipedia has quoted for this war.

Re: Myth about winning 1965 War

**
Thanks for sharing.

Re: Myth about winning 1965 War

Really? The stepping stone of research is an obscure source highly vulnerable to editing by agenda-laced contributors? Surely, the lead found/followed from this “starting point” can only bring about the most scholastic revelations.

:k:

By all practical and tactical measures, Pakistan soured the teeth of India in 1965 and it will be remembered as such. It doesn’t matter what a minority with a differing opinion say about the turn of events, or try to dissect it for self-importance sake.

Re: Myth about winning 1965 War

You have full access to internet to oppose what ever agenda-laced contributors say. :slight_smile: The reference of Wikipedia I have quoted is agreed by BBC’s report and a Pakistani general. If you have to prove otherwise what the facts were just contribute with proof. I am willing to accept them. Since I was witness to this war, for so many years.we were taught lies that India was aggressor and lost the war.

Re: Myth about winning 1965 War

OK..we have over 200 posts on this topic and i feel we are going in circles..so lets summarize few points

  1. i don’t think there is much debate that Indians crossed the international border in 1965 for a reason and we Pakistanis provided them that reason…they obviously didnt do it just for fun.

Many military generals on our side have since accepted in interviews and in different books that after culmination of skirmishes that took place between April 1965 and aug 1965 in kashmir, Pak army decided to start military operation called gibratar on 5 August 1965 but without much preparation and that operation didnt go as well as we thought.

Major General Akhtar Hussain *Malik *and BHutto are widely regarded as father of those kashmir operations..and yes sir, Bhutto as foreign minister of pakistan is widely reported to be equally responsible for those operations. Pls poora sach bolo

  1. Now kashmir was not an international border and our strategists and bhutto thought that in response indians would never cross the international border at lahore and sialkot…so basically they underestimated the enemy. and we all know that in war never underestimate your army. we made the same mistake in kargil where we underestimated indians response

  2. So up-till this point, Yes, operation gibraltar was an unmitigated disaster from beginning to end and we did not achieve anything out of it **(if someone thinks differently about operation gibraltar, please let us know why)
    **
    but

  3. when 1965 war started in September**, **no mentioning of this war would be complete without paying tribute to the great fighting spirit and unparalleled heroism of all ranks of the Pakistan Army, Navy and Air Force and notably of the SSG. In the war of 1965 into which the country stumbled surprisingly without any preparation, the Ghazis of the army, janbaz of the SSG, Shaheens of our Air force and Barbaroosas’ of Pak Navy fought bravely against a much bigger enemy and absolutely drew an honorable draw and we salute their bravery.

**so why are we mixing points 1) and 2) with point 4)? why cant we accept that operation Gibraltar was a disaster and we did not achieve anything out of it but why cant we accept as well that our armed forces fought bravely in 1965 war and saved the country from enemy?

where is the confusion? :teary1:
**

Re: Myth about winning 1965 War

^ agree to all points. As I mentioned earlier , it was the bloody jawans who stopped the forward march of indian and the tales of bravery are written by their blood which we sahll never forget. The generals of " so called well settled families " have no vision at all nor the courage to face . ( I really admire current airforce chief for his involvement in direct air strike.

Re: Myth about winning 1965 War

Do you know the most valiant jawans of 1965 eventually became the Colonals, Brigadiers and Generals of Pakistan Army that you probably so hate? Yes Musharraf also fought bravely in 1965 war. So this is how Army's rewarding and merit systems work. This is the kind of journey every General has to embark to be where he is.

The Generals were always once the brave soldiers who had every bit of courage to stare in the eyes of death, and this is how they reach the top. So think about this next time you mindlessly hate and disrespect the top military leadership for some bad apples. The Jawans courageously fighting Zarb e Azb right now are also the Brigadiers and Generals of tomorrow.

You appreciate Air Force Chief's involvement in air strikes, what do you have to say about Gen. Raheel spending so much time on frontline with no armour, no extra security, spending all Eids with the troops and evaluating strategies? Isn't the also admirable?

Re: Myth about winning 1965 War

Couldn’t agree more. History is hardly an academic discipline in Pakistan. There is serious dearth of primary source material, availability of state documents to write professional, research and evidence based ‘history’.

Agenda ridden memoirs are considered alternate history because they rebelliously differ from the orthodox view and it pleases certain fractions of the society. Anything that sounds ‘different’ is considered ‘right’. Those memoirs are totally immune to any academic scrutiny, any cross checking of sources, neither it goes through academic peer review to be considered a professional, credible and reliable history. But they sell!

Everyone loves to have a little whine about how shoddy the history writing tradition is in Pakistan, but how many national and local archives, libraries and history research institutions and departments you have in the country in order to encourage writing of history? Most of War history reports, document and real primary sources and evidences are stacked somewhere in the archives of GHQ, so how can anyone claim to have cracked the code on Pakistan’s war history is beyond me. Ridiculous.

In Britain, after 10, 20 and 30 years of restrictions, state department papers by law are released to national archives, hence history is considered a serious academic discipline dealt by professional historians who dedicate years going through plethora of quality primary source material to write exhaustive research and evidence based history…not to quote and unquote things based on bloody Wikipedia and BBC reports!

Re: Myth about winning 1965 War

^ already did mentioned abt raheel sharif's act as a great act for morale of our jwans ( in some other post , maybe mistake of my vague english ) . He did the job he is meant to do and did in a nice manner.

Similarly when the stupid generals take wrong decisions which will cost our country billions of Rs as well as Precious life of our jawans they shud be equally criticized . Our generals like Hameed gul and company should be as asked questions why our shair jawan are giving tehir blood in zarb-e-azb cleaning the thorns sewn by our strategic and very competent generals. Our SSG commandos are giving their lives there in FATA . How much we spent on them and did we spent on them for this purpose . ??

This critisizm shud not make me ghaddar.
I hope you read enough hsitroy from both uniform and non uniformed historians to agree the points mentioned in # 155.

BTW not all generals come through lower ranks.. some ( established families ) use their links to jump up as well.

I dont want to have any argument to appreciate or not appriciate Mr. Raheel. What he is doing is good for the country and shud continue it not by him but his successor as well.

Re: Myth about winning 1965 War

This is what I mean by selective butchered up history. The creation of Afghan Mujahideen started under Bhutto, precisely 10 years before Gen Hameed took over ISI. But for some reason, for people like you it is just too damn convenient to blame everything on Army because you grew up in an environment dominated by PPP's anti Army propaganda. Prove it with evidence that Benezir and Nasreeullah Babar had no role in creating Afghan Taliban? Prove it with evidence that ZAB, the founding father of intimate frinedship between Arab world and Pakistan would have resisted Saudi Arabia's request to create anti Soviet Mujahideen? So why is only Gen. Hameed treated as a punching and for anti Army folks?

For your information, is it General Raheel whose shair dil jawaans are fighting in Zarb e Azb (no Gen Hameed did not create TTP) yet Gen Raheel and all top brass leadership of Army - the initiators of Zarb e Azb- attended Gen Hameed's funeral and paid him full respect. Sums up the military, who is cleaning up the mess allegedly and solely created by Gen Hameed does not believe in any crass, hostile and utterly discrediting propaganda against Gen Hameed, where he is called everything from ghaddar to country seller. If they were ashamed of him, and did not want to be associated with him, they would not have honoured him.

[QUOTE]
BTW not all generals come through lower ranks.. some ( established families ) use their links to jump up as well.
[/QUOTE]

Really? Do you know anyone who was helicoptered into General's position from outside? They all start from the bottom. Yes soldiers who come from established military families have many advantages over soldiers who come from non military backgrounds. The advanatges are:

  • Better education and training
  • Better interpersonal skills
  • More confidence
  • Better idea of military discipline and lifestyle
  • Better guidance and advice from home
  • Chances of securing better mentoring
  • Above all, more pressure to excel and live up to family reputation